Why do clips start at 1 instead of 0?

[mikb]

the thing is, when counting in natural numbers, we add to the count when we have another complete item/object. when i have no oranges, i have zero oranges. i have one orange when i have the whole object in my hand. if you are doing push-ups, you count one after the first push-up, not before. similarly, i have one minute when a minute has passed.

arguably it is actually music counting that is "unnatural", so to speak. we count '1' before anything has happened. zero time has passed. in this sense, music counting is a special case.

hence why i think the misunderstanding by the first poster is not unreasonable, and why it's not a matter of programmers versus "normal" people...

I understand how you mean. It's just that in my experience from all fields, except programming and more complex use of math, this zero state is glossed over or ignored completely in vast majority of cases. Zero is not mentioned, even if assumed. Absence may be mentioned, but not as "zero".
Maybe your experience is different from mine, which, if so, would actually be very interesting in itself.

Thanks for clarifying. Zero is really an interesting concept.

[Da hand]

Very interesting discussion. Just to add to it, or perhaps mess it up, haha, things are slightly more complex in music notation than discussed. Not all music starts with a full bar/measure. Therefore, a bar/measure is only annotated as "1" if it is a full bar/measure. If a piece of music starts with a few notes forming an incomplete bar/measure, bar/measure "1" is the following one (image below).




In that image you would start counting bar/measure "1" after the first two notes. This is the way it is traditionally supposed to be and in that sense Live is a bit out of sync with that particular way of thinking.

But to add some more to the confusion (or maybe as a solution), I see some scores add rests before the initial notes (in a sense making the bar/measure "complete") and therefore start counting bar/measure 1 before these notes, rather than after... or some scores just don't bother with all of this and start counting the bars/measures as "1" at the beginning, no matter what - bringing us back to the way Live counts things.

Either way, of course, for me this is semantics. Whether the number I start counting from is 0 or 1 or 23 or 48 I don't really care and I just get on with making/playing music

[8E]

Very interesting discussion. Just to add to it, or perhaps mess it up, haha, things are slightly more complex in music notation than discussed. Not all music starts with a full bar/measure. Therefore, a bar/measure is only annotated as.....:

So what? The music theory clearly defines that as it is, why do you mess up with that? Shall I take some Lutoslawski to show how music can start with measure 1 in different timestamps, and so on?

Please all, stop philosophizing. Music starts at measure one, it was so for centuries, ask any musician today, check any score from the past.
Your concept that music starts at zero or whatever, keep for yourself. It is not a rocket science, and do not try to explain the world's fallacy that only you discovered and must message that to us as a Messiah.

[fishmonkey]

Very interesting discussion. Just to add to it, or perhaps mess it up, haha, things are slightly more complex in music notation than discussed. Not all music starts with a full bar/measure. Therefore, a bar/measure is only annotated as.....:

So what? The music theory clearly defines that as it is, why do you mess up with that? Shall I take some Lutoslawski to show how music can start with measure 1 in different timestamps, and so on?

Please all, stop philosophizing. Music starts at measure one, it was so for centuries, ask any musician today, check any score from the past.
Your concept that music starts at zero or whatever, keep for yourself. It is not a rocket science, and do not try to explain the world's fallacy that only you discovered and must message that to us as a Messiah.

this is a discussion forum. if the conversation doesn't interest you, feel free to move on.

nobody is arguing about what the convention is, but rather why someone might get confused.

[Da hand]

Very interesting discussion. Just to add to it, or perhaps mess it up, haha, things are slightly more complex in music notation than discussed. Not all music starts with a full bar/measure. Therefore, a bar/measure is only annotated as.....:

So what? The music theory clearly defines that as it is, why do you mess up with that? Shall I take some Lutoslawski to show how music can start with measure 1 in different timestamps, and so on?

Please all, stop philosophizing. Music starts at measure one, it was so for centuries, ask any musician today, check any score from the past.
Your concept that music starts at zero or whatever, keep for yourself. It is not a rocket science, and do not try to explain the world's fallacy that only you discovered and must message that to us as a Messiah.

Lol, like fishmonkey said, this is a forum for discussion, so we can discuss what we like - especially if it is on topic of the thread.

Moreover, if you read my post more closely (or music theory for that matter) you will see that I didn't mess with music theory at all nor that it is anything that I "discovered". In fact I was actually stating what music theory conventions define as measure 1 and showing that it is not always a clear-cut case and that, while most music starts on measure 1, it certainly doesn't always start on measure 1. This is something any musician that knows music theory would know.

If you want references that back up exactly what I said, here you go

"The first metrically complete bar within a piece of music is called ‘bar 1’ or ‘m. 1’. When the piece begins with an anacrusis (an incomplete bar at the head of a piece of music), ‘bar 1’ or ‘m. 1’ is the following bar."
Wikipedia - Paragraph 3 on this wiki - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_(music)

Sibelius Academy - http://www2.siba.fi/muste1/index.php?id=96&la=en
The Chamber Music Conference - http://cmceast.org/resources/numbering-measures.php

... of course, I can find a lot more sources stating the exact same thing.

Check it out, where does measure 4 start here... and therefore, where does measure 1 start?

[8E]

Check it out, where does measure 4 start here... and therefore, where does measure 1 start?

That proves nothing. Absolutely nothing. It just proves that music starts at the first measure, not zero measure. What you want to point out is an upbeat. Sometimes it is compensated at the end sometimes not. And you should know the reason of an upbeat in the theory of phrasing and heavy accented beats. And that this is an exception, ruled by heavy beats and phrasing.

If you give me an academic quote that there is a 0 bar, please go ahead.
I can give you this example:
"Check it out, where does measure 4 start here... and therefore, where does measure 1 start?"

[fishmonkey]

nobody is saying that there is a "zero bar". you are missing the point entirely.

[8E]

"Check it out, where does measure 4 start here... and therefore, where does measure 1 start?"

[8E]

nobody is saying that there is a "zero bar". you are missing the point entirely.

OK, than I apologize for that. Leaving now.

[mikb]

Very interesting discussion. Just to add to it, or perhaps mess it up, haha, things are slightly more complex in music notation than discussed. Not all music starts with a full bar/measure. Therefore, a bar/measure is only annotated as "1" if it is a full bar/measure. If a piece of music starts with a few notes forming an incomplete bar/measure, bar/measure "1" is the following one (image below).




In that image you would start counting bar/measure "1" after the first two notes. This is the way it is traditionally supposed to be and in that sense Live is a bit out of sync with that particular way of thinking.

But to add some more to the confusion (or maybe as a solution), I see some scores add rests before the initial notes (in a sense making the bar/measure "complete") and therefore start counting bar/measure 1 before these notes, rather than after... or some scores just don't bother with all of this and start counting the bars/measures as "1" at the beginning, no matter what - bringing us back to the way Live counts things.

Either way, of course, for me this is semantics. Whether the number I start counting from is 0 or 1 or 23 or 48 I don't really care and I just get on with making/playing music

An interesting observation that, while obvious, is a the same time easy to overlook. Live seem to think this time, prior to bar 1, is the "-1" bar space and I find that concept quite easy to understand. Though the transport bar seem somewhat confused on upbeat time in Session view.

[jestermgee]

I think the general consensus (though now a little off the track for the sake of being pedantic) would be people need to simply learn how to work with things as they have been designed (and used, by millions for decades) instead of expecting it to change to fit their own views.

To the OP, think yourself lucky you just need to count 1-2-3-4 instead of 0-1-2-3... I started out with Fasttracker back in the 90s and I had to count 00-0F-10-1F

[mikb]

I started out with Fasttracker back in the 90s and I had to count 00-0F-10-1F

[Da hand]

I think the general consensus (though now a little off the track for the sake of being pedantic) would be people need to simply learn how to work with things as they have been designed (and used, by millions for decades) instead of expecting it to change to fit their own views.

To the OP, think yourself lucky you just need to count 1-2-3-4 instead of 0-1-2-3... I started out with Fasttracker back in the 90s and I had to count 00-0F-10-1F

Exactly!

Oh damn, fastrackker! You have taken me back down memory lane... it was like making beats in the Matrix

[Da hand]

Very interesting discussion. Just to add to it, or perhaps mess it up, haha, things are slightly more complex in music notation than discussed. Not all music starts with a full bar/measure. Therefore, a bar/measure is only annotated as "1" if it is a full bar/measure. If a piece of music starts with a few notes forming an incomplete bar/measure, bar/measure "1" is the following one (image below).




In that image you would start counting bar/measure "1" after the first two notes. This is the way it is traditionally supposed to be and in that sense Live is a bit out of sync with that particular way of thinking.

But to add some more to the confusion (or maybe as a solution), I see some scores add rests before the initial notes (in a sense making the bar/measure "complete") and therefore start counting bar/measure 1 before these notes, rather than after... or some scores just don't bother with all of this and start counting the bars/measures as "1" at the beginning, no matter what - bringing us back to the way Live counts things.

Either way, of course, for me this is semantics. Whether the number I start counting from is 0 or 1 or 23 or 48 I don't really care and I just get on with making/playing music

An interesting observation that, while obvious, is a the same time easy to overlook. Live seem to think this time, prior to bar 1, is the "-1" bar space and I find that concept quite easy to understand. Though the transport bar seem somewhat confused on upbeat time in Session view.

Yes, very good point! Like you say, Live's clips are quite flexible in that regard. As for the transport grid (which is actually the same grid playing for session or arrangement) one can always start the "1" at bar 101 (to keep the count easy to read) and then have the freedom to go to bar 100 for the extra notes - or even all the 100 bars before 101 haha.

[Tuur]

Normal people count from 1. Only computers (and programmers) count from 0.

So you were 1 year old at time of birth?